Mopologetics does not follow the data where the data lead

[drumdude]

Apologetics treats the data as an obstacle to be overcome. Because they have a predetermined endpoint and they just need to get around the data to be able to arrive at the endpoint. It commonly results in not impossible stacked on not impossible stacked on not impossible. Is it plausible? Of course not. But as long as they can jin up the tiniest bit of possibility that’s all they need. Because the goal is not to show that it’s plausible, it’s to show that there is a tiny glimmer of belief and hope in the possibility.

It’s almost like this person has studied under DCP or something…

https://youtu.be/7oB6UrrFn6c?t=2924

[Philo Sofee]

The really crazy thing about it, they genuinely cannot see the problem with this. On ANY other religion they wold isolate and identify it explicitly and directly, with their own... noooooo, it's room for faith.

[Gadianton]

Actually, DCP will own it and claim that ALL worldviews do the exact same thing: play out whatever the assumptions are.

DCP will say that secular researches assume methodological naturalism, and granting this, it's impossible to ever arrive at a theistic conclusion -- that's baked right into the assumptions. Apologists simply begin with non-natural assumptions and work it out. Two models based on these differences are incommensurable, you can't judge one by the other without begging the question.

[Alphus and Omegus]

It's the nihilism of fundamentalism. He seems not to realize that this posture can never persuade a non-believer and it often fails to be convincing to people who are questioning the received wisdom.

Peterson also seems not to understand that this argument also justifies belief in any religious tradition other than Mormonism as well.

[Moksha]

Could it be that there is a postulate in supernatural physics that if an LDS apologist is completely honest they will cease to exist?

[drumdude]

Could it be that there is a postulate in supernatural physics that if an LDS apologist is completely honest they will cease to exist?

The sad irony here is that if Mopologists were honest, they could have probably retained more people in the church.

[Rivendale]

The really crazy thing about it, they genuinely cannot see the problem with this. On ANY other religion they wold isolate and identify it explicitly and directly, with their own... noooooo, it's room for faith.

Satan was well aware of God's CV and yet gave him the middle finger. Using faith as an excuse to preserve free agency is countered by Satan himself from the get go. Lamen and Lemual had personal visitation from beings of refined matter yet kept raising hell. It is almost like a test to see who can believe in something despite the evidence.

[drumdude]

Sure. Moral questions, aesthetic questions, questions of whether there is purpose in the universe or not and, if so what it might be. And on and on and on. Many of the most important questions are beyond the reach of science, and science has been effective because it has understood its proper sphere.

Is abortion right or wrong? Under what circumstances? No test tube will give you the answer. What should our policy in the Ukraine war be? Counting polar bears won't help. Is Hemingway or Faulkner the better novelist? Should I calculate their comma-to-word ratio in order to settle that question? Should I count the average number of paint drops used per canvas by Van Gogh and Rembrandt in order to decide which is the better artist? Whom should I marry? No matter how carefully I calibrate my instruments, they won't tell me. Should I become a dentist or a doctor? Ultimately, no chemical test or particle accelerator will counsel me on that decision. What made Churchill a great leader? Or was he great leader? The answer isn't in the stars.

This is such a common problem with DCP's thinking. He starts off with a reasonable point and then quickly devolves into silly strawmen and exaggeration to try and score an easy point. That kind of thing is fine for us uncultured heathens on the discussion board. But it's unbefitting a supposed PhD scholar.

[hauslern]

DanP rants on about NDEs
One scientist has argued he knows how people experience these and nothing to do with out of body experiences.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6170042/
Near-Death Experiences: Neuroscience Perspectives on Near-Death Experiences

Near-Death Feature Neuroscience Considerations
Tunnel Retinal ischemia (common with systemic hypotension)
Light Robust link with visual system (e.g. REM)
Appearing Dead Atonia while alert
Out-of-Body Temporoparietal association
Life Review Activating memory in the face of danger
Bliss Dopamine reward system
Narrative Quality Left hemisphere, limbic and other brain regions
Paranormal Impressions Limbic system
Mystical Oneness Serotonergic-Second Amendment receptors and limbic system

[Moksha]

Lamen and Lemual had personal visitation from beings of refined matter yet kept raising hell. It is almost like a test to see who can believe in something despite the evidence.

It's like would Meriadoc Brandybuck and Pippin Took refrain from eating pilfered vegetables if they were told not to by the Great Pumpkin.